CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Lancaster Court
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Inspected but not rated; the previous Good rating stayed unchanged, with some safety and management concerns checked.
Inspectors carried out a targeted inspection after receiving concerns about safety, record keeping, infection control, moving and handling, and accident and incident management. They visited on 6, 11, 18 and 24 August 2020, and gathered information from staff, managers, health professionals and other agencies.
The home was clean, had supplies of protective equipment and generally kept people safe from infection. Staff were described as kind and knowledgeable, and call bells were answered promptly. However, some staff were not clear about reporting safeguarding concerns to outside agencies. Some care plans also needed more detail about moving and handling.
There were also concerns about mask fit, social distancing during lunch, the infection control policy, limited activities for people cared for in bed, and some staff feeling unfairly treated. The report did not give new ratings. The previous overall Good rating, published in February 2019, remained unchanged because this inspection only checked specific concerns.
Clean home and infection supplies
Inspectors found the home clean and saw that protective equipment was available. The report says the mask supply problem had been resolved by the time of writing.
“People were protected from the risk of acquiring infections and the service was clean.” from the report
Kind care
Staff interacted with people kindly and compassionately during the inspection.
“Staff interacted with people in a kind and compassionate manner.” from the report
Prompt responses
Call bells were answered promptly, and staff knew people's needs and preferences.
“During the inspection call bells were answered in a timely manner and staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and how they wanted to be cared for.” from the report
Moving and handling knowledge
Although some written care plans needed more detail, staff could explain how to use equipment safely, including hoists and slings.
“Staff were knowledgeable about moving and handling practices and the equipment people needed to support them to move safely.” from the report
Teamwork during the pandemic
Most staff reported that they worked well together and felt supported during the pandemic.
“The majority of staff spoke positively about how they had worked closely as a team during the pandemic” from the report
Safeguarding reporting
seriousSome staff were not clear about their responsibility to report concerns to outside agencies promptly. CQC recommended that the provider strengthen staff knowledge of safeguarding and whistleblowing.
“Staff were not confident about reporting any concerns to external agencies such as the local authority safeguarding team.” from the report
Incomplete moving and handling guidance
needs fixingSome care plans did not explain clearly how staff should support people or when equipment might no longer be suitable. CQC recommended reviewing the detail in care plans.
“some care plans lacked detail of how staff needed to support individuals.” from the report
Infection control practice
needs fixingInspectors saw masks slipping and being worn below noses or chins. Social distancing was not always followed at lunchtime, cooling equipment was not used in line with guidance, and the infection control policy was not up to date.
“During the lunch service social distancing guidelines were not always being followed in either the ground floor or the first floor dining rooms.” from the report
Limited activities
minorInspectors saw little engagement in activities during their visit, particularly for people cared for in bed. The visit took place around lunchtime, which limited what inspectors observed.
“we saw limited engagement with people in terms of activities, especially those cared for in bed.” from the report
Staff views of management
needs fixingSome staff said they did not feel fairly treated or supported by the registered manager, although most staff described the support and teamwork positively.
“Some staff told us they felt they did not receive fair treatment and support from the registered manager.” from the report
- 01What have you done to make sure every staff member knows when and how to report safeguarding concerns to the local authority or another outside agency?
- 02Have you rewritten moving and handling care plans so they explain the equipment to use and when staff should ask for a new assessment?
- 03What changes have you made to mask fitting, social distancing, cooling equipment and the infection control policy?
- 04How do you make sure people who are cared for in bed have regular activities and meaningful engagement?
- 05How have you responded to staff concerns about fair treatment and support from management?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns within Safe and Well-led, so it did not assess the full five key questions and the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 September 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with effective management across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 January 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care plans, service records and the home’s quality checks, and observed care during the day.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they were happy, felt safe and found staff kind. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, staffing, infection control and care planning were managed well.
Inspectors also found that people’s choices, privacy, dignity and independence were respected. There were activities, support for hobbies and personalised care. The home had a registered manager and systems to check quality and learn from incidents and complaints.
The home was rated Good at its previous inspection, published in June 2016, and remained Good at this inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw caring interactions. Staff knew people’s names, offered reassurance and supported privacy and dignity.
“We saw very caring interactions between care staff and people in the home.” from the report
Good safety arrangements
Risks were assessed and reviewed. Inspectors also found safe medicines practices, suitable staffing and effective infection control.
“Risks to people`s well-being and health were assessed and measures were in place to mitigate risks.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to remain involved, pursue interests and spend time with others. Activities included trips, music, exercises and games.
“There were a range of activities provided to people and these included, exercises, musical entertainments, outside trips, keeping pets in the home” from the report
Strong management
People, relatives and staff praised the management. The home used audits, feedback and incident reviews to monitor and improve care.
“The registered manager had an overarching governance system which monitored how staff fulfilled their role.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative’s risks while supporting their independence?
- 02How many staff will usually be available for my relative’s needs, and how quickly are call bells answered?
- 03How will you tailor activities to my relative’s hobbies, interests and preferences?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care decisions if their ability to communicate or make decisions changes?
- 05How would you support my relative’s wishes about end of life care?
This was an unannounced inspection that looked at the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Lancaster Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hertfordshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,300 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.